If you are part of the 'Bush must be impeached' crowd, or 'Bush has commited war crimes' crowd.....think for a moment.. ... .If Bush deserved to be impeached or charged with war crimes.. ..who do you think would bring charges against him ?
.. . . ... . . . . THE DEMOCRATS. . ... . . . ... and they would in an instant if there were anything that had chance of being PROVEN and ACCURATE . Nancy 'I foam at the mouth' Pelosi , and Ted 'blubbering drunk' Kennedy, among a long, long, list of others would wish to be the FIRST to file the charges.. . . . .but geniuses, there's no charges to be filed, BECAUSE THERE'S NO CRIMES COMMITTED.... . . .
The Democrat Party ACKNOWLEDGES THIS.. .. .
Does anyone need a 'knock on the head' to understand, or can we please talk about more intelligent issues ????
2007-01-03 08:21:31 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Sorry, liberals, if I somehow besmerched the 'good name' of Nancy Pelosi or heaven forbid, Ted Kennedy . I mistakenly thought that those 2 examples were clearly outcasts even in the Democratic Party . I don't stand by the outcasts or idiots in the Republican Party !!!
2007-01-03 08:35:12 · update #1
As much as I hate to admit it, at least the elected Democrats have a teeny bit of sense (as opposed to none at all). But its those far left movon.org michael moore air america wackos who promote this impeachment thing, mainly because they don't understand what it takes to be impeached.
2007-01-03 08:27:41 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
Logic should tell all of us that unless a president commits crimes against the Constitution, to impeach or try for crime isn't in the interest of either Democrat or Republican. All administrations have there own agendas. When enough disagree that is what will cause changes, such as the last election.
2007-01-03 08:31:16 · answer #2 · answered by edubya 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your question shows an unbelievable lack of knowledge of how the government works. In order for the house to approve articles of impeachment, the vote has to be 2/3 in favor. The vote in the senate has to be 2/3 in order to convict. The democrats have been a minority party until this week (minority = less than 50%). However even if they wanted to impeach Bush, they still wouldn't have the votes in the house or the senate without substantial support from the republicans.
In other words, your "logic" is as flawed as it can be.
2007-01-03 08:41:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
genuine and incorrect are innovations that people got here up with. you notice it began while an extremely boastful humanoid stood up and pronounced "hi! you could not try this to me! it somewhat is incorrect!" and then as quickly as the assumption grew to become into familiar then rules have been made. yet in the back of all of it is people skill to think of abstractly. through ways only with the aid of fact the universe works in a logical, life like and rational way does no longer mean that a million. it produced or created something 2. that something interior of it may be truthfully comprehensible and could seem illogical.
2016-11-26 01:12:42 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, there was nothing to investigate Clinton for, but the reps caught him in a lie during that investigation, and impeached him for it. Now, I believe that in order to KNOW that there are no mishandlings of the war, and consequently, I and many others believe that there are questions to be answered, you need to investigate, or look deeper into it. I will say that it will be political suicide to do so, but if the dems care about the US as much as Gerry Ford did, they will put the US before their OWN agendas to be re elected, and demand answers for our questions, and accountabililty for oue tax dollars (which haven't fully been explained either). Believe me, if it were a dem, it would have been done. I know this because when it was a dem, it was done. Now if you want to talk logic, how much sense does it make that EVERYTHING under Clinton was subject to inveswtigation, but the congress found NO justification for investigation under Bush? And yeah, we can talk about more intelligent issues...you first.
2007-01-03 08:28:55 · answer #5 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
How about changing the laws about impeachment, lets make it ok to impeach a president to lie about reasons to go to war, and make it not ok to impeach someone for getting blown...
Clinton gets a hummer from an intern and you damn conservatives act like he destroyed the country. Bush spends almost 400 BILLION dollars on a war that was sold on lies, and you keep defending him, What is wrong with you people?
Oh and meanwhile, ted haggart, mark foely, abrams... need a go on? How many more pedophiles do we need in government before you people will wake up?
2007-01-03 08:34:42 · answer #6 · answered by eldeeder 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Amen!
[aside to hicheheide: Clinton wasn't tripped up in a witch hunt investigation - he lied under oath during a sexual harassment trial that was brought by a state employee who Clinton had troopers bring up to his hotel room and was told to "kiss it" after he dropped his trousers. You usually have your history straight, but that was wide of the mark]
2007-01-03 08:38:45 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Thank you Bottles. As well enough of the Bush needs to be hanged
2007-01-03 08:24:58 · answer #8 · answered by Jedi 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Everyone knows that the WMD's and linking Saddam to Al Qaeda (and so to the war on terror) was a lie! Get off it!
2007-01-03 08:45:00 · answer #9 · answered by Jamie R 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Bush and Cheny have managed to hide their wrong doing under cloaks of legality. Surely you must know somewhere deep down in your soul, that they have broken many laws including those in the consitution.
2007-01-03 08:27:44 · answer #10 · answered by Lou 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋